Re: [aerogear-dev] Data Sync Thoughts

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com <mailto:supittma@redhat.com>> wrote: On 01/28/2014 12:37 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Summers Pittman > <supittma(a)redhat.com <mailto:supittma@redhat.com>> wrote: > > On 01/28/2014 12:32 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Matthias Wessendorf >> <matzew(a)apache.org <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Summers Pittman >> <supittma(a)redhat.com <mailto:supittma@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> On 01/28/2014 12:13 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Summers Pittman >>> <supittma(a)redhat.com <mailto:supittma@redhat.com>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 01/28/2014 11:46 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Lucas >>>> Holmquist <lholmqui(a)redhat.com >>>> <mailto:lholmqui@redhat.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 28, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Summers >>>> Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com >>>> <mailto:supittma@redhat.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> > On 01/28/2014 09:36 AM, Lucas Holmquist >>>> wrote: >>>> >> yup, this is another Data Sync thread, >>>> >> >>>> >>> From a client side perspective, i have >>>> concerns that there is still not a clear >>>> direction yet. >>>> >> >>>> >> I know there are multiple ideas >>>> floating around on what our model should >>>> be, i'm all for choice, but what about >>>> deciding on 1 model to get started with. >>>> Then later once we have this nailed down, >>>> we can have other "adapters" with >>>> different models perhaps >>>> > All the data model is is an envelope of >>>> sync metadata around an object >>>> > right? >>>> >>>> right >>>> >>>> > >>>> > We also need to think about the API and >>>> server/client protocol as well. >>>> > >>>> > I think that for sync 1.0 we could focus >>>> on the following behavior (it >>>> > worked for my demos at least) >>>> > >>>> > 1. We have a Sync factory similar to >>>> Pipeline, Authenticator, >>>> > Registrar, and KeyService. >>>> > 2. The Sync factory consumes/manages >>>> Synchronizer instances. >>>> > 3. AG Synchronizer listens for sync >>>> messages using UnifiedPush endpoints. >>>> i thought for a 1.0 we weren't thinking >>>> about "realtime" >>>> >>>> >>>> that is my impression as well, talking to Dan >>>> on IRC; >>>> ATM all is polling, but the sync-server will >>>> be cable of doing WebSocket/SockJS, so >>>> "connected" clients, can sync. >>> Polling is MURDER on battery, performance, and >>> "feel". WebSockets and SockJS are awesome ideas >>> for a future implementation for "real time". >>> >>> >>> As far as I understood it, the sync-server just >>> started w/ polling (pure HTTP). I think that >>> WebSocket/SockJS is not really that far away, in >>> terms of 'future' >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Push should be really used for 'wake-up', >>>> instead of changing real information; Also >>>> SimplePush clients could not even integrate >>>> here (the protocol just uses version (or >>>> timestamps) >>> Yes. >>> >>> On the topic of Simple Push, you push a URL so >>> in theory you could push >>> /Documents/${collecitonName}/${id}/${rev_id} >>> and have simple push setup to accept URLS >>> formatted that way right? Or is it more >>> limited than that? >>> >>> >>> you can simply ONLY push a version number, that's it >> I just reread things. It is worse than that. You >> can (should) only push an increasing version >> number. So anything checksum based will fail. >> >> >> >> best practice is 'timestamp' - that's all you can push >> over to those devices >> >> >> for a good reason > Yeah. I keep forgetting how simple simplepush is. > > My original though on simple push was that a client to > register as a listener for /Documents/Collections and it > would receive pushes to /Documents/Collections/foo/bar. I > was totally wrong :) > > This gives a much better context to everything that is also > going on. > > > you are now buying the real-time ? I still say skipping push initiated sync and going straight to real time isn't a great first release idea. What I am buying now is [polling]->[push initialed]->[beefing up push adapters to include good mqtt and websocket]->[real time] I doubt that push is (always) needed - not sure every mobile _really_ wants to receive a notification "something is new".

If an application relies on push in order to function it is fundamentally broken

In my earlier real time text demo I wrote a websocket push adapter so there exists code to help with that hump. > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > 4. AG Synchronizer sends sync messages >>>> using Pipes >>>> > 5. AG Synchronizer holds local data in >>>> a store >>>> > >>>> > 6. When AGSynchronizer gets a message >>>> it is responsible for updating >>>> > the Store and then notifying code >>>> listing for updates OR for notifying >>>> > the code that an error has occurred and >>>> needs to be addressed. >>>> > >>>> > 7. When the developer updates data in >>>> the store, the synchronizer >>>> > should package that data and send it to >>>> the server. The synchronizer is >>>> > responsible for error handling, >>>> retrying, back-off, etc. >>>> > >>>> > 8. We should include multiple >>>> synchronizer implementations to deal with >>>> > multiple very simple use cases which >>>> involve legacy systems. (For >>>> > instance polling to load static data on >>>> a schedule.) >>>> > >>>> > Thoughts? Tomatoes? >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >>>> >> >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> > aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >>>> > >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matthias Wessendorf >>>> >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matthias Wessendorf >>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev